On the state of recruiting
When did recruits following a coach become acceptable? You hear about Calipari's possibly taking some of his hot-shot recruits to Kentucky. You hear about Floyd's possibly taking Sidney to Arizona. And, all this is reported and speculated, as though it were a completely normal practice.
I don't get it. I think athletes who are recruited to schools with a fleeing coach should have the right to opt out. When they chose that school, that coach was a factor in their decision.
But, an athlete's change of mind ought to be between going to the original school or not going to the original school, and not between going to the coach's original school and his new school. This just seems sleazy to me.
After all, the coach recruited the athlete on the university's budget, using the university's resources, assisted by other university employees. The "contract" is between the athlete and the university, not the athlete and the coach.
So, where does a coach get off trying to lure those whom he recruited, with the original school's largesse, to his new school? This just stinks.
And yet, it seems to be commonly accepted. That recruits might follow the coach to his new school is reported, but no one seems to be outraged about it.
Maybe it's just me.
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
0 recs |
31 comments
Comments
I'm with you, Nut ...
there’s something really unseemly about this whole thing. I asked about this in the Calipari to UK thread. cabz responded that the UofM recruits added an addendum to their LOIs that if Calipari left, they could get an unconditional release from their commitment. You would think the NCAA would want to discourage that somehow.
by snorkeldorf on Apr 2, 2009 3:09 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Positive development
The NCAA is a disingenous cartel that makes tons of profit at the expense of players who have no say in any of the rules that restrict their lives.
To say that a player cant go to another school just because the coach that recruited him to the original school is there now makes no sense and would likely be an antitrust violation.
The real interesting thing that has emerged over the last few years is that top recruits are signing later and later which allows them more freedom if coaching situations change since they have no worries about getting out of their LOI if they haven’t signed one yet. As for the Memphis situation, the recruits had letters from the AD promising that if Calipari left and then wanted to transfer, he would let them. He likely would have let them anyway, but this is just a smart move by well advised players to protect themselves from the vultures in the NCAA.
by bruinponcho on Apr 2, 2009 3:50 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
This is not a legal issue,
as I see it, but an issue of character.
I don’t want to see universities impose impossible-to-enforce rules. But, then I don’t universities standing up to egomaniacal coaches, either.
UofM didn’t have to give their recruits free passes, but they did. If they had not given these releases ahead of time, they still could have later, if they so chose. Or, not.
But, no. They’re throwing wads of cash at these guys, buying ’em houses, lining up benefactors, and begging them to please come coach at our school. They give recruits free outs, should they decide to go for the sizzle, instead of the steak.
For the coach’s part, there’s even less integrity to go around. They tell the recruits, it seems, anything the recruits want to hear if the question about a coach’s staying, or not, should even come up.
(Warning: A geezer’s preaching forthcoming…)
Contrast this with, oh, say, Coach John Wooden. The last class that he promised to see graduate, did. You can be sure that recruits, in the years immediately after this “last class,” posed the same questions to him. And, you can be sure that Coach did not dance around the question, or promise them something that he might not be able to deliver, or lead them on, in any way.
Why not? Because he had character. Because his word was more important to him than a new house or wealth or his own TV show and sponsors. In his twilight coaching years, he thought ahead about this very question. He answered for himself, four years before he retired, the question of whether he had another four years in him. And he thought, specifically, about when was the last group of youngsters for whom he would promise to be there, all four years?
And, then he went right out and lived these convictions. No drama. No publicity. Just a steadfast commitment to principle.
I don’t begrudge coaches new opportunities. And, sometimes it really is better for both parties to move on. But, along the way, I remain appalled at the rampant lack of character in this profession, and at these institutions.
This is, perhaps, reason number 1427 to appreciate Coach Wooden.
As well, reason number 275 to appreciate Coach Howland. Do you recall seeing him in press conferences or running from reporters or issuing denials about interest in other jobs? Neither do I. He handled whatever overtures he has received over the years quietly, privately, with conviction and principle.
The contrast between the Caliparis and Floyds of the coaching world and Coach Howland is great and vast. The contrast between them and Coach Wooden is immeasurable.
We are very, very lucky.
by Bruinut on Apr 2, 2009 5:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yup
You are absolutely right that Calipari is no Coach Wooden (in fact he probably is the antithesis of Coach).
With the Memphis situation is that when the recruits said they wouldn’t sign unless they had a guaranteed release, the Memphis AD gambled and agreed to it. He effectively put all his eggs in one basket hoping that Calipari wouldn’t leave which in a way made sense since Calipari was the only reason Memphis was relevant. Players choose the coach, not the school. Case in point, 3 Kentucky recruits decomitted today from there now that Cal is the coach.
The real question that I have is how involved was Calipari in these decisions. If he told the Memphis players who signed to also ask for the guarantee, then shame on him. Also, if Calipari told those Kentucky recruits that they should look elsewhere, then shame on him. However, I don’t feel bad for Memphis because when you deal with the devil, it is just a matter of time until you get burned.
by bruinponcho on Apr 2, 2009 8:24 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Can't say I agree with your....
assessment of Calipari as someone like Floyd. Yes, both ditched college for the NBA and came back, but to demean his character based on…..honestly, I’m not sure what any of this is based on. Nine years at Memphis (essentially a mid-major) is enough time. The UK job opened up and how could you blame the guy. This all seems like unwarranted negative posturing. Let’s step down from our high horses and appreciate what this guy has done at relatively small schools and now he’s made it to the pinnacle of college basketball coaching (along with UCLA, UNC, Duke, etc.)
by mdjohns4 on Apr 2, 2009 10:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It's based on
several shady things that happened while at UMass and questionable relationships with agents and questionable recruiting tactics. As I’ve said elsewhere, let’s see how he does in a good conference.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
by tasser10 on Apr 3, 2009 9:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Success
in the tournament is a pretty good indicator of how well he’ll do in a big time conference.
by mdjohns4 on Apr 3, 2009 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I disagree a bit
Playing in a better conference means having to compete more for recruits and playing better opponents day in and day out. Hence, your chances of getting a higher seed are a little lower, as opposed to playing cupcakes and a few good opponents here and there. Not to mention a little less leeway in terms of academics and conference bylaws and such…
I am not saying he isn’t a good coach, but we’ll have to see if he is the world-beater he is made out to be. And, he is still sleazy-looking to me.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
by tasser10 on Apr 3, 2009 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Question...
Do you think Memphis was not competing for the same recruits as the ACC, SEC, and Big East? I’m not sure conference matters much in this case.
I can lead you to 4 Wisdom, but I can't free your brain from the evil of Punto.
by colintj on Apr 3, 2009 3:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Comments under colintj
were from me accidentally on my brother’s account
by mdjohns4 on Apr 3, 2009 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
No, you're right
but it means that the other schools in Memphis’ conference were not competing for the players that were going to Memphis. That will change in the SEC, though Calipari will still have his share of great recruits.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
by tasser10 on Apr 6, 2009 10:14 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The number of people
for whom it is fair to be compared to John Wooden is small, indeed. I’ll also grant that Calipari has been at Memphis for a pretty good stretch, and has been successful.
The reason that I lump Calipari with Floyd, and others is that I have listened to him. He speaks weasel so fluently, I’ve got to think it’s his native language.
Take his recent comments about whether his Memphis recruits might follow him to Kentucky. When he says that he “hopes” that they remain at Memphis, you can almost see him winking and feel his elbow in your ribs. When he points out that they don’t have to stay, though, you see someone covering their backside. But, then, when he goes on to imply that if they should follow him to Kentucky, and if he can persuade a couple of Kentucky’s existing players to remain, well, they just might be able to make a run at the final four, his real self is exposed for all to see.
I don’t begrudge Calipari’s taking the Kentucky gig, but I don’t respect the weasely way that he’s conducting himself over it, either.
by Bruinut on Apr 3, 2009 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Here's the thing...
It’s my belief that when these big time recruits are getting recruited, the most important relationship they make is with the coaches recruiting them. It doesn’t surprise me that a coach might expect, hope, or wish that these players follow him to the next school. My firm belief that the state of recruiting is a loyalty to the recruiter more than the medium (school) that the recruiters uses to sign players. When Calipari was recruiting these guys he had no idea he’d be at UK. I think we have to take into consideration why the recruit would attend Memphis. And that’s John Calipari and HIS basketball program. They’ve seen him send players to the league year after year. Calipari was looking out for his career interests when the job opened up, and I’m sure the recruits will do the same. What coach at Memphis is going to give them a better shot at making millions than Calipari at UK? The answer is few and far between. My understanding of his press statements are a realistic assessment of the rules, not an attempt to weasel HIS players from Memphis. But of course my argument hinges on the fact that I believe recruits build the most intimate relationship with the recruiter, not the school. And that is truly the sad state of recruiting when the ultimate goal is to be in the league as soon as possible. And for guys like Henry and Cousins, that could mean one year with Calipari at UK.
by mdjohns4 on Apr 3, 2009 1:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Disclaimer
I think I might be the only one here that actually likes Calipari.
by mdjohns4 on Apr 3, 2009 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I was neutral
until his comments after we beat Memphis in the Elite Eight in 2006. He whined so much and was making so many excuses it was despicable.
And, he just looks like a sleazebag. Sometimes you can look someone in the eye and just get that feeling. But that’s a bit more subjective…
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
by tasser10 on Apr 3, 2009 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Is it the Italian
in him? My mother’s side is Italian. I feel like I’ve seen Pitino and Calipari at family reunions.
I’m not sure if I can go with you on the whole “looks like a sleazebag” argument. You’re right about that being a subjective assessment.
What about Morrell Presley? Does he look like a thug to you?
I can lead you to 4 Wisdom, but I can't free your brain from the evil of Punto.
by colintj on Apr 3, 2009 3:45 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Like I said
I had nothing against him until his comments. So now I just associate that, and his previous shadiness at UMass, with him being sleazy. It’s not that he “looks” sleazy, it’s just a sentiment I get when I look at him. Nothing to do with personal appearance.
But hey, what do I know. I’m just the 800 lbs bruin in the room.
by tasser10 on Apr 6, 2009 10:16 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i personally like Calipari
as a coach. I think what he’s done at Memphis has been incredible. As you stated upthread, he does indeed compete for top recruits with big conferences. It’s not like Derrick Rose, CDR, Tyreke Evans, Robert Dozier, etc all were only looking at C-USA schools. They were chased by big time programs and Calipari got them to memphis despite the fact he played in CUSA. I think he’ll dominate at Kentucky – especially since the SEC is really down right now.
by bucknellbruin on Apr 5, 2009 3:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I see the school
as a whole lot more than the medium. The school is the reason there is a scholarship in the first place. It is the school’s money, not the recruiter’s, that is spent when coaches recruit. It is the school’s name, not the recruiter’s, on the LOI, the enrollment and, maybe, the diploma.
If the school is merely the medium, and the coaches are the real reason why players are where they are, then perhaps season schedules and play-off brackets ought to be drawn up by coaches, rather than by schools. Can’t you just hear Dookie V. lobbying in full voice that Coach K. should be a one-seed?
by Bruinut on Apr 3, 2009 5:23 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Missed the point
Of course schools are the reason the scholarship exists. Of course it’s the school’s money. Of course it’s the school’s name on the LOI. A player could go to any of the hundreds of schools to utilize these resources. The circumstances of scholarships, money, and LOI’s are not unique to any one program. What is unique is a coach’s ability to develop players.
My question to you mirrors my criticism of the system in general: Would the school attract as many/most student-athletes (i.e. high profile recruits) without a coach like Calipari recruiting them? I don’t think so.
The players’ uniforms indeed have school name across their chests, but do they really represent the school? I’m not talking about guys like Aboya. Obviously school means something to him, but does it really mean as much to Henry, Cousins, Holiday, Love, Mayo, etc?
My point is that the elite players are looking out for their career interests, and in this sense the school is indeed the medium to allow them to showcase that ability. The coach/recruiter meanwhile, is the one responsible for further development.
As much as this displeases me, it is the reality of college athletics for the elite players.
by mdjohns4 on Apr 3, 2009 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
My question to you mirrors my criticism of the system in general: Would the school attract as many/most student-athletes (i.e. high profile recruits) without a coach like Calipari recruiting them? I don’t think so.
I don’t think so, either.
For me, that all of coach, player, and university have to play the cards that they are dealt is not in question. Yes, that’s true.
For me, that so few can manage to sail their own, internal courses, in the full throat of these stinking winds, is what is so remarkable, and special about the few who can pull it off.
My intent is, not to pick on Coach Calipari, per se, or to deny reality, but to express recognition and appreciation for Coaches Wooden and Howland.
Case in point: CBH has, almost certainly, received overtures from other institutions or leagues about his services. He has handled these, in comparison to some of his contemporaries, quietly. As certainly, CBH could have done better for himself, in many ways, by doing a little job shopping. Higher salary, longer term, more perks. Or, maybe even a whole new job.
But, he hasn’t. It’s certainly not in his financial best interest to talk about already having his dream job, but he does. I think that’s remarkable, and very commendable. Makes me appreciate CBH, and DG for hiring him.
Thanks for the dialog. Good brain food, I think.
by Bruinut on Apr 4, 2009 11:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think
we’re in agreement with Howland. Forget that. I’m sure of it.
Where we might differ is whether or not UK is Calipari’s dream job (as I think I remember him saying) or if he is just blowing smoke up our you know whats.
I tend to believe him. I think that’s where we disagree.
Gotta love blog-debates!
by mdjohns4 on Apr 4, 2009 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
mdjohns
Haven’t seen you around here as much since we were reading your Ben Ball musings early in the season. I am very curious to hear your takes on our team next year without JH. If you have time to think about would love to read about it via FanPost.
by Nestor on Apr 4, 2009 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry Nes
I got caught up with school, graduating, and a mild case of depression at the end of the season.
I could have some thoughts up tonight after the games, maybe tomorrow.
Preliminary thoughts? This will be a hell of a team in two years…
I guess you can infer what that might mean for the upcoming season.
by mdjohns4 on Apr 4, 2009 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Not quite
I don’t begrudge Calipari for taking his dream job, and I don’t doubt his sincerity.
It’s just that I would have given him a lot more character points, had he responded to the question about recruits with something along the lines of “Well, in all good conscience, I recruited these kids, as an employee of Memphis State, to play ball at Memphis State. So, I think that’s what they should do.”
I know this is naive of me. But, it’s exactly why I respect others who take such unequivocal stands when it’s not in their immediate best interest to do so.
Peace (as we used to say in the 60s)
by Bruinut on Apr 5, 2009 5:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Redshirt question
Maybe Rye or someone else knows this, but with all of the players who are out there now with the decommits, an idea popped into my head. Since many people say that Anthony Stover is likely to redshirt (haven’t seen him play myself but I have seen others in our class and from what I have read it seems like he would be about the 12th man this year), if a scholarship player redshirts does that take up a scholarship spot? If CBH could lure another guard that is out there that would help hedge against losing JH.
by bruinponcho on Apr 2, 2009 3:52 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
some things to consider
from what i understand normally it is the school’s discretion to release a recruit from their LOI when a coach leaves a la bobo last year. calipari’s loi’s at memphis had a specific clause which allowed the recruits to pull out of their commitment if coach cal left, so don’t feel so bad for the university. they obviously knew what they were dealing with. and with regards to sidney, he still hasn’t signed anything, so if floyd would’ve left and sideny would’ve followed there was nothing to tie him to sc.
i can understand if it all seems unseemly, but maybe it is because of the characters involved and not the activity itself. i guess i don’t mind it when i consider the alternative.
Across The Face
by rb bruin on Apr 2, 2009 8:37 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Doesn't anyone want to go to a particular school because of the school
I wanted to go to UCLA starting in the fifth grade. I wanted to go to UCLA before I knew who Coach was. I can’t imagine going to any other school. I guess the difference is that I’m not a basketball star, and haven’t been told from the fifth grade that I was special and would revolutionize the NBA and the world revolved around me.
by Fox 71 on Apr 3, 2009 4:49 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
i chose UCLA too...
… but I do understand that top students in many fields might select a school based on a particular professor that they want to work with. Same thought with coaching.
Also, I may love UCLA, and it was my first choice – but if I were an elite basketball player, I’m fairly certain I wouldn’t have gone there (I went to school during the Lavin era). I’d pose a question to all of our faithful Bruins – if you were a top basketball player who wanted to improve both as a person and as a player, would you have gone to UCLA to be coached by Lavin?
by Harsha on Apr 3, 2009 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
A tough one
You pose an impossibility, i.e., to be “coached” by CHP. He never “coached” anyone or anything. But not to dodge your question, I would have gone to UCLA and taken my chances that CHP wouldn’t have ruined me.
by Fox 71 on Apr 3, 2009 2:16 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 





















